"Goverment Motors"

[Haggis@wk]

Sister's husband had a TR4..

The Lucas "Dynamo" fell apart and destroyed its commutator , everybody in town wanted $200 for a replacement. That was a week's wages!
So we got an old Ford generator from a 60-ish pickup truck for $3.
Moved that wide pulley over to the Ford, modified brackets and put it in. It was outlandishly big for the engine...

Studied the dead Lucas and decided it had same internal field connection as the Ford, so just wired it up. You remember those Lucas electromechanical regulators with rounded top? They're actually pretty robust.

We were really proud of our mechanical job but what wowed his friends at the local TR4 club was we kept the Lucas regulator.

He drove it many years.

Those little British cars were incredibly fun.... the world needs a simple little car again.

Most of the John Deere tractor parts were interchangable with the TR-2 and 3s (never had a 4) My boss at the time rebuilt and sold old cars. I'd go with him all over the countryside with him scronging parts. He rebuilt a MG-TD Mk II ( the racing verson) and had as his personal cars a Studebaker Avante with a supercharger and a TR-2. I upgraded my TR-3 to a 3/4 cam and (memory) went from 53mm to 57? 63? mm cylinder, all in one day. The earlier TRs used wet sleeve cylinders (also JD tractor parts) When my starter motor went out, I just used my crank for a month or two. Got tired of that and priced a replacement. The "official" TR price was close to $100 (in 1969!!!) the exact JD starter was $8.95. But those damn electrics. When my gas gauge finally died I used a yard stick, thank God for the horizontal gas cap!!

I sold it when I got my 64 1/2 Mustang, Hurst shifter, posi-trak and a 289 bored out to a 301, Gawd, I loved that car!!!

[analog]

And I was serious about my not flying on Airbuses.

Me too, especially after that airshow crash when it came out that the computer decided that the pilot didn't know what he was doing and overruled his input.

interesting article on AirFrance 447... http://www.spiegel.de/international/wor ... 80,00.html

dominoes were stacked up - pilots skimped on fuel because of a lot of freight had them at max weight,,, short fuel prevented a long detour around that thunderstorm,,,, airspeed sensors were a type known prone to ice,,, that thunderstorm was full of ice,, Airbus is "fly by wire" with a flight computer in between pilot and control surfaces on wings,,,, flight computer doesn't know what to do when it loses airspeed signal,,, last messages from airplane suggest cockpit crew was trying to reboot said computer....

The situation in the cockpit was made even more difficult by the fact that the flight computer of the A330 put itself into a kind of emergency program. The plane's digital brain usually supervises all activity by its pilots -- at least, as long as its sensors provide reliable data. Without a speed reading, the computer more or -less throws in the towel, which doesn't make things easier for the pilots. "The controls suddenly feel completely different to the pilot," says flight expert Hüttig. The sheer complexity of the Airbus' systems makes it difficult to control in critical phases of the flight. It would be easier for pilots if they could simply switch the computer off in critical situations, as is possible on Boeing planes.

but i'm prejudiced, i don't trust computers hence my handle "analog".
You need to read the article and form your own conclusion.
I will however add that when i lived on that small airstrip in Fla Keys half my neighbors were airline pilots.
They have a saying: "If it ain't Boeing I ain't going."

Drive by wire? Not me, thank you.

a.

[dai bread]

For some time now I have wondered how much safety information is not passed on to the public.

For many years, I think since it dropped flying-boats, Air NZ bought McDonnell-Douglas aircraft. They served very well, as far the public were aware. Then Air NZ flew a DC10 into Mt. Erebus in Antarctica.

Once the snow had settled, Air NZ sold the DC10s and bought Boeings. It has used Boeings ever since, though in recent years it has acquired some Airbus planes.

I have often wondered about the timing of that change.

[jamiebk]

The L1011 had its share of issues (from Wiki)

#The 1972 crash of Eastern Air Lines Flight 401 in the Everglades as a result of the flight crew's failure to monitor the flight instruments during a malfunction of the landing gear position indicator system was the subject of two TV movies, Crash and The Ghost of Flight 401. It was also broadcast on a Mayday episode.[55][56]
#In August 1980, a fire destroyed the L-1011 used for Saudia Flight 163 on the ground after the pilots made an emergency landing at Riyadh's International Airport due to fire in the rear of the aircraft. Delays in initiating the evacuation of the aircraft resulted in the deaths of all 287 passengers and 14 crew.[57][58]
#On 23 December 1980, Saudi Arabian Airlines Flight 162, a tire on an L-1011 exploded, penetrating the passenger cabin. The plane lost cabin pressure and two passengers fell out of the plane.[59]
#On 22 September 1981, an Eastern Airlines L-1011, registration N309EA[60], flying from Newark, New Jersey to San Juan, Puerto Rico, suffered a massive failure of its number two (tail) engine. The shrapnel from that engine inflicted damage on all four of its hydraulic systems, which were close together in the tail structure. However, fluid was lost in only 3 of the 4 systems, because the shrapnel impacted but did not puncture the lines for that fourth system. The fluid which remained pressurized in that 4th system enabled the captain to land the plane safely at John F. Kennedy International Airport, with some limited use of the outboard spoilers, the inboard ailerons and the horizontal stabilizer, plus differential engine power of the remaining two engines. There were no injuries. That additional 4th hydraulic control system (compared to 3 such systems on the DC-10) saved the plane and all on board.[61][62]
#In August 1985, Delta Air Lines Flight 191 crashed while approaching Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport in micro burst conditions. The crash killed 8 of 11 crew members and 128 of the 152 passengers on board as well as one person on the ground.[63][64]
#On 3 May 1986, Air Lanka Flight 512, an L-1011 TriStar was destroyed on the ground in Colombo, Sri Lanka, after a bomb exploded in the rear cargo hold severing the tail and killing 21 people.[65]
#On 30 July 1992, the captain of TWA Flight 843 aborted the take-off shortly after liftoff from JFK, in response to a false stall warning. The aircraft landed too hard, breaking a wing spar and starting a fire. All 292 passengers and crew evacuated safely, with only 10 minor injuries. The plane was destroyed by fire.[66]

[Haggis@wk]

General Motors will recall 1.3 million vehicles in North America to replace a power-steering motor that could fail. Affected models include 2005-2010 Chevy Cobalts and 2007-2010 Pontiac G5s. Let's see if Congress gives them the same treatment as Toyota.

[jamiebk]

General Motors will recall 1.3 million vehicles in North America to replace a power-steering motor that could fail. Affected models include 2005-2010 Chevy Cobalts and 2007-2010 Pontiac G5s. Let's see if Congress gives them the same treatment as Toyota.

Toyota's recall tops 5.3 million cars. The accelerator problem has caused deaths. GM's power steering is not a safety issue. The steering still works and you get a light and a warning of failure AND...they did not try to cover it up.

[analog]

The L1011 had its share of issues (from Wiki)

for me the significant issue is over-electronification... of all those L1011 events only the false stall warning is possibly an electronic failure....

and GM's recall is for a power steering motor ? !!!!
Motor? When did they make power steering electronic too? Oh yeah, the Nintendo generation is entering the workforce now....

there's lots of these around......
http://www.ntsb.gov/recs/letters/2008/a08_53_55.pdf

On January 25, 2008, about 0945, an Airbus A320, N462UA, operated by United Airlines as flight 731, returned to Newark Liberty International Airport (EWR), Newark, New Jersey, shortly after departure from runway 22R because three of the six electronic displays1 providing information to the flight crew went blank and several aircraft systems became inoperative........
.....
The AAIB indicated that it has investigated 14 additional display-blanking events involving the failure of the AC 1 electrical bus. In two of these events, selecting the electrical bus feed to “alternate” did not have the intended result of supplying power from the AC 2 electrical bus. These incidents indicate that, even if a flight crew is able to effectively troubleshoot the malfunction,11 the problem may not be resolved quickly. Moreover, increased flight crew workload resulting from the multiple system failures associated with this type of malfunction may impede crews’ ability to effectively troubleshoot the problem, especially under degraded environmental conditions (such as nighttime or instrument meteorological conditions).

imagine that happening in middle of night in a thunderstorm..

Here's a forum of aviation people discussing the AF447 accident - one can spend hours there...
http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/376433-af447-5.html

anyhow - all things in moderation, including technology. Remember we got to the moon with sliderules .

a.

[piqaboo]

Cant really blame this one on airplane design:

#On 3 May 1986, Air Lanka Flight 512, an L-1011 TriStar was destroyed on the ground in Colombo, Sri Lanka, after a bomb exploded in the rear cargo hold severing the tail and killing 21 people.[65]

[Haggis@wk]

Toyota announced a 0% financing on some makes and models, forcing GM to follow. Anyone who thought that the Big Three were finally getting a break when the chairman of Toyota was hauled in front of a congressional committee need to think again. Zero-percent financing for five years is going to make it very difficult for GM to return to profitability--and presumably Chrysler will be forced to follow suit. These companies are going to be on taxpayer life support for quite some time.

[jamiebk]

With the federal discount rate at .75%, the Fed Funds Target rate at .25%, and the WSJ Prime rate at 3.5% , "zero percent" financing isn't as bid of a deal as it might sound. The car companies are getting cheap money these days.

[Shapley]

With the federal discount rate at .75%, the Fed Funds Target rate at .25%, and the WSJ Prime rate at 3.5% , "zero percent" financing isn't as bid of a deal as it might sound. The car companies are getting cheap money these days.

It doesn't matter how cheap you get the money, if you're paying interest on it and lending it sans interest, you're losing. Financing used to be a big source of income for the dealers, who sold the car cheap and made up the profit loss through interest earnings. Now, they have to front-load all of the profit, making the vehicle prices higher. If Toyota can build a car cheaper than GM (and they can), they stand a better chance of winning this game.

To say they're not losing much money doesn't change the fact that they're losing money.

[Haggis@wk]

Toyota skeptic (as am I)

So James Sikes, who made a dramatic 911 call from his Prius on Interstate 8 in San Diego earlier this week, is effectively claiming he had an electrical problem that affected his throttle, his brake, and his power system, because it took him over 20 minutes to stop his car.

Somehow no one in the press has asked Sikes how it is he could stop the car once it had slowed to 50 mph, but not when it was going 90 mph. Have Balloon Boy and the finger-in-the-chili taught us nothing?

[jamiebk]

Toyota skeptic (as am I)

So James Sikes, who made a dramatic 911 call from his Prius on Interstate 8 in San Diego earlier this week, is effectively claiming he had an electrical problem that affected his throttle, his brake, and his power system, because it took him over 20 minutes to stop his car.

Somehow no one in the press has asked Sikes how it is he could stop the car once it had slowed to 50 mph, but not when it was going 90 mph. Have Balloon Boy and the finger-in-the-chili taught us nothing?

I guess that you didn't hear the whole story. A CHP officer pulled along side the man and directed him on steps to slow the car from 90 MPH by literally jamming on and pretty much burning out his brakes. When the car slowed to 50 MPH the officer placed his patrol car in front of the Prius and slowed the car by applying the brakes on the patrol car...by that time, the man was able to shut down the motor. If you had listened to the 911 call you would hear (as did the CHP officer) the sheer panic in the man's voice. It was no stunt

[analog]

some of you car guys might like this link...

http://www.techno-fandom.org/~hobbit/ca ... ius03.html

about 3/4 way down is a section on Prius brakes. The computer really is in between the pedal and the wheel cylinders.

Brake by wire, with backup systems
This is one of most complex aspects of the car ..........

Braking request == MCYL pressure
Request read from PMC1 and PMC2 (red)
Fluid redirected to stroke simulator spring-piston
to provide normal "brake feel"
SMC1 and SMC2 normally closed off

Wheel pressure sent from the accumulator
Apply/release solenoids do their dance
Pxx per-wheel sensors provide feedback...


Backup systems
Direct hydraulic to front wheels
If all else fails (or no power), SMC1 and SMC2 open
No assist, but you can limp home
...or to the dealer...

In that brake boost comes from a 2000 psi reservoir with electric pump, it's similar to the Bendix system that caused Chrysler so much trouble in early nineties. The computer adds an order of magnitude complexity.

is effectively claiming he had an electrical problem that affected his throttle, his brake, and his power system, because it took him over 20 minutes to stop his car.

All three, plus the shifter lever, go through that darned CANBUS computer to do their jobs.

it's not only Toyota building cars this way. But they're the ones getting hammered for it.

a.

[Giant Communist Robot]

it's not only Toyota building cars this way. But they're the ones getting hammered for it.

An interesting and provocative statement. Toyota is the one we hear about in the media, could some others have a problem too? I pointed out earlier that this technology has been used for years on aircraft, and I presume they have a higher threshold of safety than cars. I'm curious if this is a design flaw or a quality control problem. I have heard that about six years ago Toyota made a change in their quality philosophy.

The quote sort of suggests others may have a problem, too, and we only hear about Toyota. The recent financial trouble with American manufacturers might only be a coincidence. Consipiracy minded people might say Toyota is being targeted to help GM sales.

[jamiebk]

Consipiracy minded people might say Toyota is being targeted to help GM sales.

That'd be Haggis

[Giant Communist Robot]

I went back and read some of the earlier posts and I see my last should just be ignored.

When I was in high school I owned a 1955 TR-2. They didn't have door handles, you had to jump over the door or reach inside and pull a little slide. It was fun. By the time I owned it, it was beat up and worn out. Once I was pulled over by the police. I figured it was for speeding, but the policeman told me my car was smoking so much he thought it was on fire. I decided to rebuild it. I remember thing like seven bolts to hold a little itty-bitty fan on. By the time I got it apart I was overwhelmed by it. I put an ad in the paper, "must be rebuilt, $35." It was a big pile of parts at the end of my parent's driveway. Eventually someone came to buy it. It was a father and his son. I was nearby and I heard them as they approached. The father said "there it is" and I could sense the pride in his voice, as if he had discovered a jewel. The son replled "you're kidding" and the shock and horror he felt was clear. They towed the mess away.

I grew up in a town that had a drag strip and from about age 12 we all went to watch the races. Mickey Thompson. Gas Rhonda. Hayden Profit. Fords were the winners. So after the TR-2 I bought a 57 Ford with a 312. I was working at a gas station near a freeway and a wreck was towed in. It was a Mercury that belonged to a middle-aged woman. After some talk she sold me the 406 and transmission. The trans seals were damaged and needed to be replaced, but the whole affair was a bolt-in for my Fairlane. From a friend who raced a Plymouth I bought some mag wheels, they shared the same bolt pattern, and from another I bought an aluminum high-rise tri-power. The hood didn't have clearance to close, so for a while I drove around without one. Eventually I cut a hole in it--it was kinda Mickey Moused, but I liked the way the carbs and air cleaner stuck up through it. Some time later I came across a NHRA rule book and discovered the rules were skewed in Ford's favor; they couldn't win otherwise. Those small block Chevy's could breath really well, as I found out on the street.

[Haggis@wk]

I guess that you didn't hear the whole story. A CHP officer pulled along side the man and directed him on steps to slow the car from 90 MPH by literally jamming on and pretty much burning out his brakes. When the car slowed to 50 MPH the officer placed his patrol car in front of the Prius and slowed the car by applying the brakes on the patrol car...by that time, the man was able to shut down the motor. If you had listened to the 911 call you would hear (as did the CHP officer) the sheer panic in the man's voice. It was no stunt

Nope, I heard it all. He had enough time to call 911 and wait till a patrol car was there to see his car doing 90 and made sure the "emergency" went on long enough so the news helicopters could record the drama? Nope, Just ain't buying it. Plus there is no car built that's engine is stronger than it's brakes. And he already hired a law firm to sue Toyota. Remember that all of the sudden aceleration problems with the Audi's were driver error. This guy smelled a juicy law suit to bail him out of his bankrupcy.

[Haggis@wk]

Consipiracy minded people might say Toyota is being targeted to help GM sales.

That'd be Haggis

...and you don't????

[Shapley]

An interesting and provocative statement. Toyota is the one we hear about in the media, could some others have a problem too?

I posted this a while back:
Toyotal Leads in Unintended Acceleration Complaints

According to the article, Toyota has a little less than 3 times the number of such complaints as Ford, the nearest on the list: 1133 to 387. Chrysler has 171 and GM 152. This would indicate that others have problems, but Toyota's is the most frequent, although the article does not mention the spike in such complaints since the media began hounding on Toyota. There was an article recently that dealt with that issue, indicating that the belated filings were possibly intended to bolster claims for a class-action lawsuit.